Tony Duckett v. Salvador Godinez Brian McKay

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that 24 shackling during the sentencing hearing in the absence of a compelling need and consideration of less 25 restrictive alternatives constitutes constitutional error
• holding that 17 shackling during the sentencing hearing in the absence of a compelling need and consideration of 18 less restrictive alternatives constitutes constitutional error
• holding that the shackling of a defendant during the penalty phase of a capital trial is inherently prejudicial and may only occur if compelling circumstances justify the need for shackling to maintain order in the courtroom
• holding that the shackling of a defendant during the penalty phase of a capital trial is inherently prejudicial and may only occur if compelling circumstances justify the need for shackling to maintain order in the courtroom
• holding that the shackling of a defendant during the penalty phase of a capital trial is inherently prejudicial and may only occur if compelling circumstances justify the need for shackling to maintain order in the courtroom
• holding that the shackling of a defendant during the penalty phase of a capital trial is inherently prejudicial and may only occur if compelling circumstances justify the need for shackling to maintain order in the courtroom

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).